get_depth

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions the API endpoint and parameter, but lacks details on data structure, freshness, side effects, or rate limits. For a raw data tool, more transparency is needed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two concise sentences in Japanese: first states the core purpose and API endpoint, second lists use cases and parameter usage. No redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain what the tool returns. It only mentions 'raw data' from /depth API but does not describe the response structure (e.g., bids/asks, timestamps). This is a significant gap for a data source tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with both parameters described. The description adds 'maxLevelsで層数制限' which essentially repeats the schema's 'Maximum number of price levels', adding no new meaning beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it gets raw order book data (板の生データ取得) and specifies the direct /depth API endpoint. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like get_candles, get_ticker, etc., which serve different purposes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for difference calculation, wall detection, and pressure analysis, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any when-not-to-use guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.